April 11, 2015 Feraoun and the Algerian Revolution: The identities of the Algerian Revolution and the ways in which an Algerian writer interprets these identities By: Taylor Theodossiou Introduction The Algerian War is often viewed as a war between the French and the Algerians, fought during the years of 1954 and 1962. However, this is not an accurate representation of the Algerian war and those who lived and died during that time. The Algerian war was a war of identity and those caught up in the events had to forge their own identities within the context of the conflicting ideologies of the time. One man who was forced to do so was Mouloud Feraoun, a Kabyle born in Algeria but given a French education. This connection to all of the conflicting sides of the debate was not unique to Feraoun; it was actually quite common for an Algerian to have more than one identity to which they might identify. As tensions started to rise to a breaking point in 1955 Mouloud Feraoun began writing a journal of the war. Mouloud Feraoun was a unique individual living during an incredibly unique time period. Feraoun was born in Tizi-Hibel, a village in Kabylia to parents that emphasized the importance of education from an early age. As a talented student he was recognized and given a scholarship to study at a French high school before attending French university in Algeria. However, he always maintained a connection to his Kabyle and Algerian roots. He married a woman according to Kabyle customs and she, “by most accounts, was a traditional wife, was deeply connected to her Kabyle customs, had no formal education, and spoke only Berber.”1 All of these things had a deep impact on the way he addressed the issues in his Journal. 1 Feraoun, Mouloud. Journal 1955-1962: Reflections on the French Algerian War. Edited by James D. Le Sueur. Translated by Mary Ellen Wolf and Claude Fouillade. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000. p. xii-xiii 1 His upbringing caused him to believe that he brought a necessary voice to the interpretation of the Algerian war. He was attempting to document his perspective of the Algerian war. Feraoun was in a unique position because of his connections to all of the different factions of the Algerian war. Feraoun was also a Kabyle and proud of this identity, one he emphasized regularly in his Journal. His fierce loyalty to his Kabyle identity provided a different approach to the Algerian war. Instead of simply being French or Arab he claimed to be a combination of all of these things. Identity was important to Feraoun and it was his own identity as well as those who surrounded him on which much of his Journal was focused. He was not only documenting the war but the individuals who played their part in the war as well. As an Algerian intellectual he was respected by many of the French. Intellectuals actually played a significant role in both the Algerian war and its aftermath. During this period they often intervened in the debates over decolonization. The state, military, police, other intellectuals, vigilante groups, and the OAS often targeted them for the role they played in the war and the decolonization of Algeria.2 The OAS was the group responsible for the assassination of Feraoun just three days before the Evian accords for his membership in the Centre Sociaux Educatif en Algerie.3 His Journal was initially published in France and it is clear at times that he is writing for a French audience. He also was a Kabyle, which historically the French had viewed much more sympathetically than the Arab population. However, despite this he was also a Muslim and an Algerian making him sympathetic towards the 2 Le Sueur, James D. Uncivil War: Intelelctuals and Identity Politics During the Decolonization of Algeria. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001. p. 3 3 Le Sueur, 55 2 Algerian cause. Towards the end of 1960 Feraoun began to review his writings and admits to the difficulty of writing such a book: “I am frightened by my candor, my audacity, my cruelty, and, at times, my blind spots and prejudice…Now that is its done, now that everything has been recorded—good or bad, true or false, just or unjust—now that we can foresee the end of this nightmare, must I keep all of this for myself?”4 However, in the end he believes that the writing of his journal is appropriate only because it adds to the already exhaustive writing about the Algerian war. He hopes that it is considered “one more document in an extremely poignant dossier. Nothing more.”5 Taking a closer look at Feraoun’s interpretations of the war, whether they were just or unjust interpretations is a way to formulate an answer to what exactly happened during the Algerian war. The many different groups that were involved, whether voluntarily or involuntary, can be studied and looked at from all different angles. Looking at it from the angle Feraoun provides in his journals one can formulate an understanding of the war. Identity plays a large role in shaping the outcome of the war. The entire war was simply a question of identity in which every player had to ask himself where he or she fit. Feraoun focused on three identities in particular and so it is these three identities most of this paper will focus on as well. These identities can be broadly classified as Kabyle, Arab, and French. Like most identities, they cannot be defined in simple terms, instead they are often conflicting and changing and this was especially true for the Algerian revolution. However, looking at these three identities, even if they are broad, are useful in understanding the war. In the end it was the National Liberation Front managing to convince the French that Algeria was united behind an Algerian identity that managed to 4 Feraoun, 294 5 Feraoun, 295 3 win them their independence. Feraoun addresses each of these identities in his writings, both in the way he identifies to them and the ways others respond to them. Feraoun’s Journal looks at the revolution through the eyes of a man who is not directly involved in any of the action. Feraoun was not a member of the FLN, the French army, or the OAS. Instead he was an Algerian citizen caught up in the conflict like the majority of the country. He was personally connected to these groups and so this gave him the chance to critically analyze them and their ideologies. With a man as multifaceted as Feraoun he was better able to understand the opposing sides of the conflict: the hope of the FLN, the desperation of the French, the anger of the pieds noirs, the exhaustion of the Kabyles, and so on. He addresses many of these concepts in Journal and it is specifically the way he addresses the French, Arab, and Kabyle identities, which will be addressed in this paper. However, simply because Feraoun provided a unique interpretation of these events does not mean that his interpretations should be relied on as the only true interpretations of what was happening in Algeria and around the world during this time. After all, Feraoun had always been writing his book to be published in France. His editor was a Frenchman named Emmanuel Roblés and it was to this man that Feraoun sent entries from his Journal to be edited.6 However, the book is useful as a tool to consider the Algerian revolution from a different perspective. Feraoun focused so much on the identities of the players and their roles in Algeria during the revolution that it is useful to look at each of these identities in turn, both in how Feraoun interprets these identities and how they are interpreted in history, in order to better understand what happened during the Algerian revolution. 6 Feraoun, xii 4 When Feraoun first began writing in November of 1955 a year after the war had begun.7 . The reason for this late start was the refusal of all those involved to gauge the important of the war. He talks about the Muslims and the Christians and how they had “nothing to say to one another” and the “Kabyles” like the “French” were “not thinking about anything.8 By beginning his journal a year after the beginning of the revolution he is admitting that the conflict that began a year ago would continue and it was worth noting the changing of identities that occurred during this time period. In order to understand these identities it is essential to return to the beginning, 1830, when the French first conquered Algeria. It was during the colonization of Algeria that the identities that would become influential during the revolution really developed. The French used their influence not only to establish themselves as the dominating power in Algeria but to also establish the Kabyle myth. French colonial rule also created the necessary conditions for the revolution to happen in the first place. Algerians rebelled against the colonial power and in order to do so they had to reevaluate their identity as separate as from what France had defined it during their colonial rule. Historiographical Outlook on the Colonial Identities of Algeria Algeria was France’s first nineteenth century colony and because of this it was often seen as the crown jewel of the empire. This made the outbreak of revolution in November of 1954 to be very surprising for the French. They had spent over a hundred years trying to make Algeria an integral part of France and it turned in to a complete failure, and ultimately the political independence of Algeria in 1962 and while the world 7 Feraoun, 13 8 Feraoun, 11 5 considered Algeria to be the “archetype of the mid-twentieth century struggle to end Western colonialism.”9 Therefore, the need to maintain Algeria as a colony of France was of the only goal of France during the revolution. The insurgent army of the National Liberation Front, however, was at an advantage because they were fighting for their homeland. Both the French and the FLN were two major aspects of the Algerian revolution and their importance is often examined in Feraoun’s Journal. Feraoun’s construction of the Algerian war places a lot of emphasis on the identities and ideologies of those involved. However, in order to understand these identities and ideologies it is important to return to the beginning. And at the “beginning” of Algeria were the Amazigh. It is with the Amazigh that the history of the people Algeria began; however, it is certainly not where it ends. After the Amazigh there came the arrival of other groups and even movements that were also crucial to the development and the understanding of the Algerian war. Only after understanding the history of Algeria can the identities of Algerians be understood and the distinct roles each groups involved in the revolution be explained. In the past Algeria had always been a land of passages where civilization would converge from the East and the West. It was this land that the Amazigh10 first called 9 Shepard, Todd. The Invention of Decolonization: The Algerian War and the Remaking of France. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2006. p. 1. 10 Amazigh is the word that will be described to call the indigenous people of North Africa. They speak their own language, Tamazight, and were not originally Muslim. It is the term they use to call themselves and means “free men.” Another term that is often used is Berber. This is derived from the Latin word barbarus and was used to describe anyone not a member of the Roman Empire. The Amazigh are not a homogenous group and therefore it is simply used as a general term for the indigenous people of North Africa separate from the Arabs. For instance, a term that will be used a lot is Kabyle, who are a subgroup of the Amazigh. 6 home and they can trace their ancestry back to a time before 4000 B.C.E.11 The Arabs came many years later and while they never conquered the Amazigh militarily they were able to bring with them a religion—Islam—that had a profound impact on the shape of the Amazigh culture and society. The invaders were able to convert the Amazigh leaders who, in turn, converted much of the Amazigh population of North Africa.12 This common religion managed to bring about a melding together of the two distinct populations, Amazigh and Arab.13 However, some differences remained and it was on these differences that the French capitalized. For instance, Arabs were stereotyped, as nomadic plain-dwellers while the Amazigh were sedentary mountain-dwellers.14 The nomadic dwellers, the Arabs, were seen as dangerous, volatile, and very unlike their French colonizers. The Amazigh, on the other hand, were considered to be much more civilized than their Arab counterparts and so much of their attempts at assimilation were focused on the Amazigh. While this may have been generally true for certain groups of Amazigh and Arabs it was still a large generalization about groups that were far more diverse. Although there were many other types of people living in Algeria at the time, it is on these two groups that the French focused, using them both to their advantage when trying to establish control. What is interesting is that, unlike many of its sub-Saharan counterparts, Algeria was not rich in natural resources. In fact the only two goods that were produced in 11 Stora, Benjamin. Algeria, 1830-2000: A Short History. Translated by Jane Marie Todd. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001. p. 2 12 Stora, 3 13 Stora, 3 14 Lorcin, Patricia M.E. Imperial Identities: Stereotyping, prejudice and race in colonial Algeria. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 1995. p. 2 7 enough quantity to be exported outside of the region were olive oil and wax.15 The French wanted to consolidate its influence in the western Mediterranean basin when? Be more specific here.16 Algeria provided outlets to trade and human capital for industrialization. When France first invaded Algeria in 1830 it was supposedly to avenge the dey of Algiers’ “fly-whisk attack” on the French consul that had occurred three years earlier in 1827.17 This invasion was initially called an expedition but in a decade the French military commander and governor of the colony in Algeria, Bugeaud, had encouraged the notion of military occupation and administration in France’s first nineteenth century colony.18 The need for colonization soon seemed to become obvious for the Frenchmen on the ground in Algeria and the only question was how to go about colonizing its people. In France, however, the debate was centered on whether or not to conquer and colonize, marking the beginning of the discord between those still in France and the French settlers of Algeria.19 In order to establish the colony France needed to first subdue those indigenous to the region. The defeat of Abd-el-Kader in 1847 and the fall of Kabylia in 1857 marked the end of the military campaign to conquer Algeria. However, the military continued to rule Algeria. As this was its first nineteenth century colony the French rulers proceeded largely by trial and error with no coherent policy on how to treat the Amazigh and the Arabs.20 While they did not succeed in their assimilationist goals they did succeed in creating lasting legacies of what it meant to be Kabyle, Amazigh, and Arab in Algeria. 15 Lorcin, 24 16 Stora, 4 17 Stora, 5 18 Lorcin, 6-7 19 Lorcin, 18 20 Lorcin, 217 8 Very soon after the French arrived in Algeria they adopted a prejudice towards the Arabs based on old opinions of Islam. At first it seemed as though the French would give the Muslims a chance. In a proclamation addressed to the French troops in May of 1830 they were told that the Arabs would view the French as liberators from the Turks and would be seeking an alliance with them.21 However, as soon as it became clear that the Arabs would be very resistant to the idea of colonial rule the French returned to the old racial stereotypes of what it meant to be Muslim. The Muslims they fought with for control in Algeria were perceived to be nomads who “equated independence with the right to pillage and wander.”22 These Algerians, according to the French were very much uncivilized. Unfortunately for the French it wasn’t because of a lack of civilization that Algeria was resisting to colonial rule. Algerians already had a distinct understanding of their identities, which would come back in to play during the revolution, and so they were already fighting to preserve these identities. In 1832 Abd-el-Kader was chosen by a collection of tribal leaders to lead a jihad against the French.23 This opposition marked the beginning of the increasingly deteriorating relationship between the Christian French and the Muslim Arabs. The fact that the Arabs of Algeria had a religion to fight for marked them as an even greater threat to the French because they assumed, correctly, that this would make it even harder for them to assimilate in to French society. The French believed that the strength of the Islamic culture made Arabs into a “recalcitrant pupil” and so they believed they would 21 Lorcin, 18-19 22 Lorcin, 30 23 Lorcin, 17 9